The Supreme Court has struck down Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map in Louisiana v. Callais, ruling 6-3 that the state’s creation of a second majority-Black district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The map had been drawn after lower courts found Louisiana’s 2022 plan likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because it contained only one majority-Black district in a state where Black residents make up roughly one-third of the population. But the new 2024 map prompted a separate challenge from voters who argued that Louisiana had sorted voters by race in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The Court left in place a lower-court ruling barring the state from using the 2024 map in future elections.
The majority’s reasoning turns on whether Louisiana actually needed to create a second majority-Black district to comply with Section 2. Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion does not eliminate Section 2, but it substantially narrows how it can justify race-conscious redistricting. Under the majority’s approach, plaintiffs bringing a Section 2 vote-dilution claim must do more than show that a majority-minority district could be drawn. They must offer an alternative map that also satisfies the state’s legitimate redistricting goals, such as protecting incumbents or pursuing partisan objectives. They also must show racial bloc voting in a way that controls for party affiliation, and the broader inquiry must focus on evidence tied to present-day intentional racial discrimination in voting. Applying that framework, the majority concluded that Louisiana did not have a compelling interest to draw the second majority-Black district because the Section 2 case against the earlier map had not been proven under the Court’s updated standard.
Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented. In her view, the majority’s new requirements make Section 2 far harder to enforce in redistricting cases, especially in states where race and party preference are closely correlated. Kagan argued that Congress amended Section 2 in 1982 to prohibit voting practices with discriminatory results, not only those motivated by discriminatory intent, and that the majority’s decision effectively moves the law back toward an intent-based standard. The immediate result is that Louisiana must proceed without the 2024 map, and the decision is likely to reshape how states, courts, and plaintiffs evaluate Voting Rights Act claims in redistricting cases going forward. The Callais decision has already sparked a mid-decade rush to redistrict before the 2026 primaries. Below is a summary of Post-Callais activity in the states so far.
Louisiana
Louisiana is the direct fallout state. After Callais invalidated the state’s second majority-Black congressional district, Gov. Jeff Landry suspended the May 16, 2026, U.S. House primaries for congressional races only, citing the need to avoid conducting elections under a map the Supreme Court had rejected. The governor’s order says other May 16 offices and ballot measures would proceed, but congressional races would be paused. Legal challenges to the suspension have already followed. A Louisiana legislative committee that oversees redistricting will meet Friday to hear public comments on a new congressional district map.
Florida
Florida moved immediately after Callais. Gov. Ron DeSantis had already called a special session on congressional redistricting, and the Legislature approved HB 1-D on April 29, 2026, the same day Callais was decided. The House passed the measure 83-28, and the Senate passed it 21-17, sending the map to DeSantis. The map is expected to increase Republican opportunities, and litigation is expected, especially because Florida’s Fair Districts provisions independently restrict partisan favoritism and minority vote dilution under state law. The DeSantis administration is arguing that the Callais decision nullifies Florida’s Fair Districts amendments.
Alabama
Alabama’s response evolved quickly. On the day of the Callais decision, Gov. Kay Ivey initially said Alabama was not in a position to call a special session immediately, but two days later, she called lawmakers into special session as the state sought Supreme Court permission to move away from court-imposed congressional lines and adjust election timing. The key constraint is that Alabama remains under federal-court orders from the Milligan case remedial process. Alabama’s attorney general has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift an injunction that prevents the Legislature from redrawing the congressional map before 2030, and the special session is aimed at moving primaries if that request succeeds.
Tennessee
Tennessee is one of the clearest post-Callais response states. Gov. Bill Lee called a special legislative session beginning May 5, 2026, to review Tennessee’s congressional map after pressure from Republican officials, including Sen. Marsha Blackburn, to revisit the Memphis-based 9th District. The political target is straightforward: Tennessee currently has an 8-1 Republican congressional delegation, and the Memphis-based 9th District is the state’s only Democratic-held U.S. House seat. A new congressional map (below) was unveiled on May 6.
MIssissippi
Mississippi’s most concrete post-Callais action is not congressional redistricting, but state Supreme Court redistricting. Before Callais, U.S. District Judge Sharion Aycock had ruled that Mississippi’s Supreme Court districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and could not be used in future elections; Gov. Tate Reeves then announced that he would call lawmakers into a special session to redraw those judicial districts 21 days after the Supreme Court decided Callais. Following the Callais decision, the special session was scheduled for May 20, while Judge Aycock weighed how to proceed with remedial judicial districts and possible November special elections. In addition, congressional redistricting is under public and political discussion after Callais, including calls to target Rep. Bennie Thompson’s 2nd District, but it is not currently a formal part of the May 20 special-session agenda. Speaker Jason White’s creation of a House redistricting select committee suggests congressional and legislative map issues may be studied for the 2027 regular session rather than handled immediately.
Georgia
Georgia’s immediate response to Callais is to wait. After Callais, Gov. Brian Kemp said he supports the Court’s decision but will not call a special session to redraw Georgia’s maps for the 2026 elections because voting is already underway for the May 19 primaries. GPB, carrying AP reporting, quoted Kemp saying that “Callais requires Georgia to adopt new electoral maps before the 2028 election cycle,” but that 2026 is too late because the election process has begun.
The practical target, if Georgia revisits maps later, is likely Rep. Sanford Bishop’s 2nd Congressional District in southwest Georgia. GPB reported that Bishop’s district “could be in play” after Callais, and that Republican candidates for governor were already calling for lawmakers to redraw maps, while voting-rights advocates warned that Georgia could lose multiple Democratic-leaning seats if the state redraws aggressively under the new legal standard. For now, though, Georgia is not moving a 2026 map; the fight is likely pushed to the 2028 cycle unless that posture changes.
South Carolina
South Carolina moved quickly in the immediate wake of Callais, with House Speaker Murrell Smith telling reporters the Legislature was starting “a process to give ourselves options,” while emphasizing there was “absolutely no promise whatsoever” that the body would ultimately redraw the map. The White House had asked GOP leaders in both chambers to examine the ruling and the state’s current map. In an 87-25 vote, the South Carolina House approved a sine die amendment allowing lawmakers to return after adjournment to take up congressional redistricting, clearing the first major procedural hurdle in the post-Callais push.
The measure now heads to the state Senate, where Republicans still need a two-thirds vote, and only a handful of defections could derail the effort. Sen. Greg Hembree called the redistricting attempt “an absolutely terrible idea,” noting Republicans already hold six of seven House seats. Divisions within the Republican caucus over how aggressively to proceed, and fears of a “dummymander” that backfires, mean the path forward remains uncertain even after Wednesday’s House vote.
Find us on:
